CO 

o 
>-■ 


■^mWiP^^'x*" 


The 


Service  Bulletin 


of  the 
Bureau  of  Personnel  Research 

H.  G.  KENAGY,  Editor 


VoL  4 


MAY,  1922 


No.  7 


In  this  Issue : 


ARE  LABOR  TURNOVER 

RECORDS  WORTH  WHILE 

By 

David  R.  Craig 


The  Division  of  Cooperative  Research 
Carnegie  Institute  of  Technology,  Pittsburgh,  Pa. 


"I 


'   ...   • ..  .  1 ;,.  ;. ,  >  ... 


ARE  LABOR  TURNOVER  RECORDS  WORTH  WHILE 

A  Criticism  of  the  Present  Methods  of 

Recording  and  Interpreting 

Ttirnover  Date  -  With 

Suggestions  for  a 

More  Reliable  and 

Valuable  Plan 


By 

David  R.  Craig 
Assistant  Professor,  PersoHnel  Administration, 
Carnegie  Institute  of  Technology. 


The  Bureau  of  Personnel  Research 
May,  1922. 


»      » 


FOREWORD 


Labor  turnover  is  R  popular   subject  in  omployment 
manegement  circles.     Since  the  tine   some  years  ago  when  a 
few  interested  individuals  draw  the  attention  of  employees 
to  the  huge  cost  of  high  turnover  among  employers,  employ- 
ment managers  have  co  ncerned  themselves  very  earnestly  with 
the  causes  and  remedies.     In  fact  most   such  officials  owe    . 
their  positions  to  the  fact  of  labor  tvirnover.     Discussions, 
speeches,  magazine  articles,   even  books,  have  dealt  with 
the  problem  in  its  many  phases  -  from  the   social  effects 
of  rapid  shifting  to  highly  technical  formulae  for  meoBuring 
the  phenomenon* 

Rarely,  very  rarely,  has  the   study  of  labor  turn- 
over been  looked  at  from  the  pragmatic  standpoint  of  the 
total  value  of  results  obtained,     professor  Craig  has 
established  this  fact  very  clearly  in  the  discussion  which 
follows.     He  points  out  the  fallacies  and  insufficiencies 
of  ordinary  turnover  data,   r..rd  at  the   same  time  the  waste 
of  effort  and  money   involved  in  keeping  records  which  have 
no  real  value.     From  an  analysis  of  the  actual  turnover  data 
in  a  large  department  store,  he   illustrates  his  criticisms 
of  ordinary  records  and  suggests  valuable  changes  irtiich  can 
be  made. 


H.  G.   Kenagy, 
Assistant  Director. 


TABLE  OF  COKTEKTS 


/    tabor  Tvirnover  Records  Todsiy     «.«.*  1 

What  Do  The  Percentages  Mean?    ....4 3 

What  Do  The  Causes  of  Lator  Turnover  Mean  ..  3 

Comparing  Labor  Turnover  Percentages   4 

,  When  Is  Labor  Turnover  High?    5 

Reliability  of  the   Causes  of  Lnbor  Turnover.  6 

'  0n6  Company's  Results   8 

Conclusions   < 12 

Other  Ways  of  Analyzing  Labor  Turnover    .....   12 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2007  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.archiYe.org/details/arelaborturnoverOOcrairich 


ARE  LABOR  THHKO^ER  RECORDS  WORTH  7JHILB 

Labor  Turnover  Records  To-^day. 

Five  or  six  years  ago  labor  ttirnover  records  began  to 
gain  the  wide  currency  -which  they  now  enjoy.  It  "waB  important  to 
notice,  especially  during  the  war  situation,  the  costly  mobility 
of  labor,  and  to  take  every  precaution  that  this  shifting  should 
be  prevented  as  far  as  possible.  It  was  delightful  to  bo  able  at 
last  to  express  something  about  human  beings  in  a  mathematical 
formula . 

At  first  the  statement  of  the  turnover  in  simple  per- 
centage figxzres  was  the  standard  method.  After  raising,  the  question 
of  the  method  of  computing  this  figure,  the  standard  \vas  adopted  of 
dividing  the  total  number  of  separations  by  the  average  working 
force;  although  there  were  mary  who  thought  that  the  numerator  of 
the  fraction  should  be  the  number  of  replacements  rather  than  the 
number  of  separations.  The  separations  standard  waa  adopted  by  the 
U.  S.  Department  of  Labor.  Labor  turnover  percentages  are  today 
commonly  computed  by  this  method. 

Hot  long  afterwards  the  desirability  of  analyzing  labor 
turnover  figures  became  apparent.  Forms  were  drafted  to  simplify 
the  recording  of  turnover  data  by  causes,  and  the  form  now  most 
widely  prevalent  is  the  one  which  v/as  put  out  by  the  Library  Bureau. 
It  has  since  been  modified  by  a  large  number  of  companies  to  suit 
their  particular  heeds.  Almost  every  company  that  keeps  labor  turn- 
over records  today  is  using  some  modification  of  this  original  form 

The  causes  of  labor  turnover  are  usually  classified  in 
some  such  manner  as  the  following: 


-2- 


R© signed  or   left  of  own  accord 

Better  jot 

Salary  or  wages 

Dissatisfied  with  work 

Unable  to  get  along  with  superior 

Leaving  city 

Steadier  employment 

111  health 

Chagge  of  vocation 
Discharged 

Careless 

Incompetent 

Liquor 

Trouble  breeder 

Misconduct 

Stealing  or  dishonesty 

Unreliable 

Insubordinate 

?liyeiccl  reasons  (sometimes  classified  under  "laid  off") 
Laid  off 

Decrease  of  fore© 

Lack  of  T/ork 
Unavoidable 

Injured 

Death 
T»i^nsferred 

The  str.ndr.rd  form  for  recording  turnover  data  usually 
prints  these  reasons  across  the  top  of  the  card  (horizontnl  axis),  and 
down  the  side  (vertical  axis)  the  department  numbers  oi"  names,  (for 
the  monthly  and  yearly  summarjr  by  departments),  the  names  of  the 
months  (for  the  monthly  recapitulations),  or  the  days  of  the  month, 
(for  the  daily  recording)* 

The  results  obtained  by  the  use  of  this  form  have 
apparently  been  satisfactory;  at  any  rate,  they  have  continued  in  use. 
It  is  possible  to  say,  as  a  result  of  these  records,  that  a  certain 
number  of  men  left  department  No.  30  because  of  dissatisfaction  with 
their  work,  or  because  of  finding  a  better  job,  or  because  of  changing 
their  vocations.  This  classifies  the  labor  turnover  and  reduces  it 
to  simple  elements.  The  causes  can  then  b©  attacked,  and  the  tvirnover 
reduced.  Of  cotirse,  this  is  the  aim  of  keeping  labor  turnover  records. 


-3- 

If  they  do  not  servo  this  purpoeo,  then  they  are  like  any   other  use- 
less office  enctonbrance^^ 

So  much  for  the  theory  of  this  form.  How  about  the 
practice? 
What  Do  The  Percentages  Mean? 

It  is  proper  to  raise  some  questions  regarding  the  simple 
percentages.  Is  it  always  fair  to  say  to  Foreman  Jones  that  his 
labor  turnover  is  higher  than  that  of  Foreman  Brown,  and  to  hold  him 
to  account  for  that  fact?  Does  this  prove  that  Foreman  Brown  is  a 
better  foreman?  May-it  not  possibly  be  explained  that  Foreman  Jones 
lost  less  men  than  Foreman  B»ovm,  but  since  he  had  a  much  smaller 
department  the  denominator  of  his  fraction  brought  his  psrcentage  up 
beyond  Foreman  Brown's. 
Riot  .Dt>- The  Causes  of  Labor  Turnover  ilxa? 

Al-so^^lt  is  proper  to^  raise  the  question:  Have  labor 
turnover  records,  as  currently  kept,  served  their  purpose  faithfully? 
Has  the  employment  manager  been  able  to  point  out  to  the  General 
Manager  the  \veak  spots  of  the  personnel  policy?  Has  the  information 
which  the  employment  manager  must  have  from  these  records  been 
reliable?  Have  the  resigning  employees  always  stated  the  real  reasons 
for  resigning?  Have  foremen  always  given  the  real  reasons  to  the 
employment  manager  when  discharging  an  employee? 

These  are  serious  questions  to  raise,  because  they  strike 
at  the  only  t^-vo  aspects  of  labor  turnover  that  are  currently  studied. 
If  they  can  be  ansv/ered  satisfactorily,  then  labor  turnover  can 
proceed  evenly  along  its  'my,   if  not,  then  we  must  consider  some 
revision  of  our  method  of  studying  this  industrial  phenomenon. 

Let  us  take  up  first  the  original  sspect  of  labor  turnover. 


-4> 

and  secondly  the  aspect  which  was  added  shortly  afteirvmrds* 
Comparing  Labor  Turnover  Percentages. 

The  comparison  of  percentages  bet'.^een  departments  and  be- 
tween companies  is  fraught  with  dangers.     The  reduction  of  the  fig\ires 
to  a   percentage  basis  lends  them  n   superficial  canparability.     But 
unless  the  denominators  of  the  fractions  are  nearly  comparable,  then 
the  quotients  are  not   strictly  comparable.     Suppose  for  instance  that 
■S7e  have  tvro  depo.rtments,   one  of    100  men,  one  of  25  men.     Such  depart- 
ments exist  in  every  large  plant.     Each  department  loses  10  men.     The 
labor  turnover  is   10  per  cent  fbr  the  large  department,  and  40  per 
cent  for  the   small  department.     Is  the  foreman  of  the   small  department 
to  be  charged  ■-jd.th  a     ttirnover  four  times  as  large  as  the  turnover  in 
the  large  department?     This  is  hardly  fair.     Furthermore,  responsibility 
for  labor  turnover  hinges  on  the  causes  that  are  given  for  it  and  the 
foreman  of  the 'small  department  may  not  be  wholly  responsible. 

Comparison  of  labor  turnover  bet'A'een  companies  is  more 
accurate;  with  large  denominators  the  quotients  become  comparable  in 
greater  degree.     But  comparison  of  labor  turnover  bet^A^een  companies 
can  serve  no  conceivably  useful  purpose  unless  it  be  to  add  to  the 
prestige  of  one  employment  manager  and  detract  from  that  of  another. 
L'.bor  turnover  vdll  never  be  reduced  by  comparing  the  figures  for 
last  year  bete/een  c ompa nie s ,  either  in  government  reports  or   in 
chambers  of  commerce.     To  be   sure,  it   is  helpful  to  know  whether  the 
adoption  of  special  methods  by  a     particular  company  has  been  successful 
in  reducing  its  labor  turnca'er,  and  the  comparisons  betT.veen  companies 
may  possibly  shcrr  which  company's  methods  have  been  successful.     But 
in  most  cases  the  usual  thought  of  the  employment  manager  is  "I  was 
better  or  worse  than  so-and-so." 


-5- 
Lator  Turnover  Htgff? 


The  comparison  of  labor  turnover  percentases,  then,  even 
■when  they  are  arrived  at  in   similar  ways,   is  not  specially  useful. 
What  can  be  said  of  the  percentages  taken  by  themselves? 

The  percentage  figure  must  always  be  interpreted  with 
reforenco  to  scroe  standard.     If  the  turnover  is  75  per  cent,    is  that 
high  or   low?     Is  it  high  or  low  with  reference  to  what  standard?     The 
ideal  labor  turnover  figure   is  not  zero,   in  spite  of  the  fact  that 
many  industrial  managers  have  made  a  fetich  in  the  past  five  years 
of  the  words  "reducing  labor  turnover".     No  manager  vdll  say  that  ho 
would  be  pleased  to  see  his  labor  turnover  disappear  entirely,  for 
that  xvould  imply  a  stagnant  condition  of  his  business  v/hich  would  be 
worse,  possibly,  than  a  high  labor  turnover.     No  standard  has  ever 
been  set  for   labor  turnover,  though  we  may  put  down  five  or  ten  per 
cent  per  year  as  a  tentative  ideal,  with  reasonable  aspurnace  that 
not  one  company  in  a     thousand  will  reach  it. 

Yet  this  ideal  refers  only  to  times  of  prosperity.     In 
the  industrial  depression  from  -wAiich  we  are  just  emerging,  labor 
turnover,  on  the  basis  of   separations,  rose  enormously.     Men  wet© 
being  laid  off  every  day,  because  there  was  no  work  for  them  to  do. 
Only  the  best  men  were  kept,   and  sometimes  they  too  had  to  be 
released. 

Then  came  the  period  of  starting  up  again,  and  in  this 
process,  v/ith  so  many  good  men  out   of  work  andapplying  for  work 
every  day,  many  companies  took  advantage  of  the  opportunity  to  re- 
place even  the  good  men  in  their  employ  with  better  men  from  the 
outside,  Trtienever  they  could  be   secured.     Is  it  right  to  say  that  a 
low  labor  turnover,  of  five  to  ten  per  cent,   is  ideal  in  such  a  time? 


-6- 

If  a  comparer  0!?.n  better  itself  by  repl-^.cing  poor  men  '-/ith  good  men, 
or  replacing  good  men  with  better  men,   it  is  idle  to  ta^k  about 
"reducing  labor  turnover".     In  such  n  time  a  high  labor  turnover  is 
an  excellent  thing  —  for  the  company,  if  not  immediately  or 
remotely  so  for  the  men  replaced. 

Viewing  the  labor  turnover  in  times  of  prosperity,  the 
same   interpretation  holds.      I^  a  company,  by  dint  of  careful  search 
and  selection,   discovers  a  good  man,  that  company  is  ill-advised  if 
it  thinks  twice  of  labor  turnover  before  seciiring  him. 

Labor  turnover  percentages,  then,     mean  nothing  by  them- 
selves. 

They  are  ^igh  with  reference  to  one   standard,    low  with  reference  to 
another.     The   standard  which  happens  to  be  in  operation  at  any  given 
time  depejfids  on  general  business  conditions  and  the  resulting  con-"*." 
dition  of  the  labor  market.     Labor  tiirnover    should  be  fairly  high  in 
times  of  depression,   lov/  in  times  of  prosperity,   if  the   ideal  is  to 
be  reached.     This  v/ill  be  true  until  depressions  and  prosperous 
periods  are  brought  within  control.     Since   there   is  no   such  thing  as 
"normal  times"   (normal  times,  you  will  notice,  are  always  "next  year", 
or  "last  year"),  there  is  no  norm  that  can  be  a  fixed  reference  for 
labor  turnover. 
Reliability  of  the  Pauses  of  Labor  Tnrjiover . 

What  of  the  causes  of  labor  turnover?     There  are  two  kinds 
of  reasons  for  human  actions.     One   is    the  kind  which  the  individual 
gives  as  his  reason  for  behaving  as  ho  does.     Sometimes  this  is  also 
the  real  reason.     But  it  is  easy  to  demonstrate  that  our  motives  are 
not  slways  known  to  us.     For  example,  the  business  man  says  that  the 
Soldier  Bonus   should  be   defeated  because  it  is  wrong  to  put  a  price 


-7- 

on  patriotism;  the  ex-eoldier  points  out  that  the  country  ought  to 
Bhavf   its  gratitude  to  its  heroes.  These  are  "good"  reasons.  The 
other  kind  of  reasons  is  the  "real"  reason.  The  business  man  will 
have  to  pay  a  tax  if  the  bonus  goes  through;  the  soldier  will  lose 
money  if  it  doesn't. 

How  often  will  "good"  reasons  and  "renl"  reasons  coincide 
in  labor  turnover  records?  Quite  often,  perhaps;  very  seldom,  perhaps. 
It  is  not  possible  to  rely  on  all  of  them. 

■When  an  employee  resigns  from  a  company,  he  may  give  any 
one  of  the  reasons  that  are  listed,  and  possibly  some  others.  If  he 
is  an  ordinary  employee,  he  is  likely  to  remember  that  employment  is 
nowhere  very  secure,  that  he  may  need  to  come  back  to  his  compary  at 
a  future  time.  He  will  therefore  want  to  leave  open  every  avenue  of 
return.  Now,  if  he  remarks  as  he  quits  that  he  is  resigning  because 
he  is  dissatisfied  with  his  wages,  or  dissatisfied  with  his  work,  or 
because  he  is  xanable  to  get  a  long  with  his  superior,  these  facts  are 
likely  to  be  remembered  and  held  against  him  the  next  time  he  appears 
at  the  gate  looking  for  work.  It  is  very  easy  for  him  to  hide  these 
"real"  reasons  and  say  that  he  "is  leaving  the  city", "has  a  better 
job",  "is  in  ill-health",  or  give  any  of  the  other  "alibi"  reasons 
that  are  listed  or  that  occur  to  him  epontaneously. 

When  a  foreman  wishes  to  discharge  an  employee,  he  may 
givB  any  number  of  reasons  in  the  same  manner.  A  great  many  of  the 
reasons  are  verifiable  from  the  records.  "Attendance"  is  one  of  them. 
"Dishonesty"  is  another.  The  writer  recalls  a  case  in  which  the  real 
reason  was  not  given,  and  a  substitute  reason  supplied.  In  a  company 
employing  4500  men,  the  labor  turnover  of  one  department  was  more  than 
1000  per  cent.  It  was  found,  on  analyzing  the  records,  that  a  good 


-8- 

percentage  of  the  men  had  been  discharged  for  incompetence,  yet  the 
employment  manager  had  been  very  careful  to  supply  the  foreman  with 
tradesman  of  good  ability  and  considerable  experience;   some  of  them 
had  had  twenty  years  experience  at  their  trade,  which  vras  longer  than 
the  foreman's  own  relationship  to  it.     It  was  found,   on  questioning 
the  men  more  closely,  that  the  foreman  was  trying  to  get  non-vmion  men 
in  a  trade  which  was  completely  unionized.     It  was  an  impossibility. 
In  order  to  avoid  the  appearance  of  discrimination,  the  foreman  had 
set  down  incompetence  as  the  reason  for  discharging  able  men  who  held 
union  cards.     The  employment  manager  can  hardly  be  ^tiided  by  this  type 
of  cooperation. 

"Insubordination"   is  not  always  a  choice  "alibi"  reason, 
for  the  reason  that  there  are  always  two  sides  to  insubordination, 
and  if  a  foreman  is  constantly  releasing  men  because  of  this  reason, 
he   is   likely  to  be  criticized  keenly  on  his  methods  of   supervision. 
If  this  reason  is  given,  then,   it  is   likely  to  be  the  right  one. 

One  Company's  results. 

Let  us  examine  the  records  of  a  particular  compary  for  one 
year,   and  analyze  the  causes  of  separations.     The  table  belov/  is  taken 
from  the   1921  records  of  a  depsirtment  store,   and  supplies  the  desired 
data : 

(See  next  page) 


■■"    ■      ••.  •  1 .  >  (J  , 

:  ^^.y-i.  -  ■ 


^  '        ,    ^ 


.'."      i 


\    , 


-9- 
TABLE  NO.    I 


Reasons  for 

Number 

Per  cent 

Per 

cent 

Per  cent 

Leaving 

left 

Resigned 

Dismissed 

total 

Married 

24 

5.7 

2.1 

Moved  away 

56 

13.0 

8.6 

Return  to 

School 

22 

5.2 

2.0 

Hea 1th 

44 

10.3 

4.0 

Diiable  to  get 

along  with  s\;5)erior    5 

1.1 

.5 

Dissatisfied  with 

v7ork 

14 

2.3 

1.3 

Other  position 

110 

26.8 

9.8 

Salary 

2 

5 

' 

.2 

Ho  notice 

81 

19.2 

7.1 

Stay  home 

68 

15.9 

6.1 

[Total  resigned) 

(426) 

100  .OJS 

(38.7) 

Attendance 

21 

3, 

.1 

1.9 

Incompetence 

84 

12 

.2 

7.4 

Dishonesty 

8 

1 

.2 

.7 

Insubor  d  in?,  t  ion 

14 

2. 

.0 

1.3 

Wrong  type 

10 

1 

.5 

.9 

Retired  on 

pension 

0 

0 

.0 

0.0 

Reducing  force 

248 

36 

.0 

22.1 

Temporary 

302 

44 

.0 

27.0 

(Total  dismissed) 

(687) 

•                         • 

lOQff. 

(61.3) 

Total  loss  1113  100. 09? 

In  this  table,   as  in  the  classification  of  causes  of  turn- 
over given  on  page  2,  two  general  divisions  are   shown.     These  coxirespond 
to  "Reasons  given  by  employees  for  resigning  or  quitting"  and  "Reasons 
given  by  foreman  or  department  heads  for  dismissing  or  firing  employees". 
These  divisions  must  again  be  divided  into  reasons  which  are  reliable 
and  reasons  v;hich  are  not  reliable.     The  resigning  employee  has  every 
reason  not  to  say  that  dissatisfaction  vdth  wages,  dissatisfaction 
with  work,  and  inability  to  get   along  with  superior  are  determining 
causes  for  his  resignation.     If,  therefore,  he  gives  any  one  of  these 
reasons,  it  may  be  presumed  to  be  true.     He  may  give  aur  of  the  other 


-10- 

reasons  instead,   if  he   likos.     Of  these  other  reasons,  which  we  shall 
refer  to  ns  "nlibi"  reasons,   sojno  may  t>e  correctly  stated  and  may  be 
found  to  be  justified  in  any  ?iven  case.     But  it  is  important  to  note 
that  the  three  reasons  v/hich  usually  operate  to  aause  resignations  art- 
the  very  ones  which  an  employee  hesitates  to  give.     These  we  have  every 
reason  to  beliovo,   then,   if  ho  gives  them.    We  have  some  cause  to  doubt 
the  others,   and  less  reason  to  believe  in  their  reliability.     They  may 
be  classified  as  follor/s: 

TABLE  NO.   2. 
Reasons  which  are  reliable 

Married  (verifiable) 

Unable  to  get  rilong  tdth  superior 

Dissatisfied  with  work 

Salary 

Reasons  which  are  not  reliable 

Moved  away 

Return  to  school 

Health 

Other  position 

No  notice 

Stay  at  home 

In  the  same  manner,    scjtb   of  the  reasons  vrhich  foremen  give 

are  sometimes  verifiable  and  some  ere   not.     The  reliable  and  the  "alibi" 

reasons  may  be  classified  as  follows: 

TABLE  no.  3. 

Reasons  vrhich  are  reliable 

Attendance  (verifiable) 
Dishonesty 
7/rong  type 
Retired  on  pension 
Insubordinr>.  t  ion 

Reasons  which  are  not  reliable 

Incompetence 
Reduc  ing ' force 
Temporary 


-li- 


on the  basis  of  this  discussion,   let  us  reclassify  the  first 
Bianmary  of  cousos  shown  in  Table  No.  1  above. 

In  order  to  make  clearer  the  point  at  issue,  the  two  causee 
called  "reducing  force"  and  "temporary"  have  been  placed  in  a  separate 
class  in  this  table,  under  the  heading  "partly  reliable".     The  business 
of  a  department  store   is   inherently  so  seasonal  that  we  cannot  say  these 
reasons  are  absolutely  unreliable.     Btit  they  make   such  good  "alibi" 
reasons  that  they  cannot  be  called  thoroughly  reliable. 

TABLE  ITO.     4,_ 

Per  cent  of  total 


Z.lfo 

.5 

1.3 

.2 

1.9 
.7 

1,3 

.9 

0.0 


5.6 
2.0 
4.0 
9.8 
7.1 
6,1 
7.4 
42.0f„ 


Reasons  for   leaving 

Number  left 

(RELLA.BIS) 

Married 

24 

Unable  to  get  along 

with  superior 

5 

Dissatisfied  with  work 

14 

Dissatisfied  ivith  salary 

2 

Attendance 

21 

Dishonesty 

8 

Insubor  dina  t  ion 

14 

Wrong  type 

10 

Retired  on  pension 

0 

Total   (reliable) 

S8' 

(OTIRELIABLE) 

Moved  away 

B6 

Retvirn  to  sbhool 

22 

Health 

44 

Other  position 

110 

No  notice 

81 

Stay  at  home 

68 

Incompetence 

84 

Total   (iinreliable) 

46S' 

(PARTLY  RELIABIE) 

Reducing  force 
Temporary  employmenrb 
Total   (partly  reliable) 

Tota  Is 


248 

302 
550 

1113 


22.1 

27.0 

49.1?5 

100.0^ 


Notice  especially  those  figures  which  isrhow  the  total  number 
of  separations  caused  by  the  reliable  reasons,  and  those  caused  by  the 


I<'eu/^bility  /^naly3i5  of  Reasons  f^of^  lu/^NOvEf^. 


2      <»       e      6      IP     It     /^     [t>      la     20    ^^     24     Zi     26    so    32    34     3fc    30  ^/?   4e    44    4 


6  40   50 


"T — r 


I^tUP^QLS. 


Mar  ^ied. 

,  Xnt  >  Uifa)  o  rL:y/A|<7  ^  vb/  "> 
I  1 


O 


\v/ 


T^tal. 


rh 


l5o 


'arL. 


S^iptficir. 


I       I 


^iyN/^tL-lAlSLE. 


f.)os  t'Hon 


T<;>-r/»4- 


FV^fSTlLY  ^EiJ/^  BI_E 


'Tentpartlru  ernyo/oyrrjcrn*; 


»n 


Force 


rjT-^c 


-12- 

unreliable  ones.     8.9  per  cent  of  the   separations  are  caused  by  reasons 
of  which  we  are  ipfe  certain* 

To  be   stare,  a     large  proportion  of  the  labor  turnover  in 
this  particular  case  has  been  caused  by  lay-offs  and  the  employment  of 
temporary  help.     We  do  not  kno^v  how  large  that  proportion  really  is, 
and  how  much  the   stated  figvire  must  be  reduced  for  unreliability, 
possibly  90  per  cent  is  caused  by  the  release  of  temporary  employees 
and  layoffs. 
Conclusions 

Our   labor  turnover   forms,  then,   do  not  record  the  causes  in 
a  trustv/orthy  mr.nner.     If  the   percentages  of  labor  turnover  are  not 
to  be  compared,   '?nd  are   subject  to  differing  interpretations  at 
different  seasons,  and   if  the   causes  given  on  ovir  forms  and  by  o\ar 
employees  are  not  as  reliable  a s  we  should  like,   is  it  not  proper  to 
ask  ourselves,   "Is  it  worth  while  to  keep  labor  turnover  records?" 
Other  Ways  of  Analyzing  Labor  Turnover. 

It  is  v/ithout '  doubt  important  to  record  labor  tvirnover;  with 
this  view  we  have  no  quarrel.     The  thesis  of  this  paper  is  that  the 
labor  ttirnover  records,  as  ordinarily  kept,  cons\ane  a  great  deal  more 
time  and  clerical   labor  tlian  the  results  warrant.     There  are  other 
ways  in  which  the   labor  turnover  record  may  be  kept  which  will  save 
much  of  this  time  and  effort,  and  yield  fully  as  important  results. 

The  fundamental  record  includes  only  those  facts  regarding 
labor  turnover  which  are   indispensable.     These  are: 

1.  The  average  working  force   in  each  department. 

2.  The  nTjmber  "'ho  leave  each  department   (if  the  turnover 

is  kept  on  the  basis  of  separations);   or  the  number 
who  are  actually  replaced  -within  a  department  (if  the 
turnover   is  kept  on  the  basis  of  replacments) . 

8.  The   percentage  figure  vrhich  results  from  dividing  (2)  by  (l). 


>" 

w 


-13- 

ThiB  will  give  the  fundamentals.     In  matty  cases  the 
departmen'tiB  vrill  have  a  reasonoble  labor  tulrnover,   and  it  will  not  b© 
necessary  to  consider  those   departments  further.     If  the  ttornover  in 
other  departments  is  considered  to  be  too  high  or  too  lo7/,  depending 
on  the  position  of  the  business  ciarve  at  the  time,   this  can  then  be 
investigated  by  other  means.     The  feature  of  this  plan  is  that  a  great 
deal  of  unnecessary  work  is  avoided,   and  only  necessary  v/ork  is  done. 

In  order  to  analyze  further  the  labor  turnover  in  those 
departments  ivhere  it  is  unreasonably  high  or  lev/,  as  the  case  mfty  be, 
two  or  three  methods  may  be  adopted.     They  are  as  follows: 

1.  An  informal  inquiry  could  be  made  of  the  department 
manager  or  foreman,  asking  him  to  explain  ar^  deviation  from  desirable 
turnover.     This  method  would  be  satisfactory  only  if  the  foreman  can 
be  trusted  to  cooperate   successfully  'Adth  the  employment  manager,   and 
is  not  personally  responsible  for  the  tiirnovor  because  of  some  trait 
of  character  or  temperament  which  makes  him  an  undesirable  boss  to 
those  under  him. 

2.  The  second  method  tal<Bs  into  consideration  age,  pay, 
length  of  service,  home  conditions,  and  a  number  of  other  items  that 
affect  each  employee  who  leaves,   and  plots  each  one  of  these  variables 
against  the  other,  to  see  whether  there  is  any  general  tendency  in  the 
department  under  scrutiny  to  group  tivo  of  these  variables  together  in 
such  a  manner  as  to  produce  undesirable  results.* 

3.  A  comparison  can  be  made  between  those  who  leave  the 
dejmrtment  and  those  who  stay  with  it.     This  can  be  done  by  taking  a 
department  census  of  the  particular  elements  named  above  (age,  pay, etc.) 
and  plotting  a  distribution  cvrve  for  each  type  of  individual  —  the 

*  This  method  has  been  outlined  in  an  article  in  the  May  1921  issue  of 
Industrial  Management,  entitled  "The  Analysis  of  Labor  record's." 


Infer-relations  of  Ti^r-rtovei-  Doia. 

Larigth  of  Set-vice 

/»9. 

P^y 

Morifel 
Status 

Home 
Condition) 

Oe/,cr,d«nf» 

Source 

^•aaons  for  L«avirtg : 

1 

0 

lA 

■X 

1 

5 

■»- 
c 

i 

1 

c 
1 

1 

c 
« 

c 

1 
'J- 

*> 

C 

1 

N 

1 

1 

C 

g 

c 

1 

1 

r 

> 

1 

0 

M 
M 

f 
0- 

N 

1 

o 

10 

O 
m 

2 

N 

ffU 

O 

1 

1 

% 

1 

in 

1 

m 

t- 
C 
«i 

L 

8 

> 

0 

1 
■+• 
c 
«l 

1 

c 

0 

•» 

-♦- 

1 

• 

0 

0 

2 

M 

m 

^ 

X 

> 

1 

c 

• 

it 

3) 

I 

9i 
C 

L 
(I 

1 

0 

Oiasa+iafied  wi+h  pay 

• 

" 

••" 

^: 

•• 

•• 

•"• 

... 

•• 

• 

»... 

\V 

... 

• 

:•:• 

:"• 

•••• 

•.;•• 

... 

:^" 

•  •*■ 

•' 

• 

:::•. 

*• 

.... 

*■•• 

19 

Olaaatiofiad  withFctreman 

::;' 

••■ 

• 

• 

' 

•  ••» 

;... 

•• 

* 

' 

•• 

.... 

... 

:::• 

.... 

«... 

•• 

* 

••* 

•  ■• 

• 

• 

•*** 

■ 

... 

*•■ 

12 

Beffarjob 

* 

"•' 

i*" 

•••* 

• 

■ 

»• 

•  •** 

.... 

*•* 

" 

•  •> 

I' I! 

.... 

• 

"IZ 

:::: 

•*** 

..*• 

*. . 

.... 

•  •** 

■M# 

••• 

Un 

— 

•**• 

la 

Lea\'ir-)ff    C//y 

* 

M 

'• 

• 

• 

•*• 

-•■■ 

»• 

• 

*" 

»•• 

•• 

•■• 

:;:• 

'■ 

•• 

*• 

• 

»• 

•  •• 

V" 

" 

■•• 

u- 

/o 

Reason  no-f  known 

:::| 

>«•• 

•••• 

•• 

::•• 

.... 

• 

... 

-• 

!«• 

:u* 

J'" 

5?" 

«• 

••*• 

.— • 

• 

:r.: 

»i»« 

•••• 

"*' 

;- 

• 

.... 

22 

Jnc  o  n->;0  e /wn  ■/• 

•• 

— • 

*• 

.... 

— 

•• 

■•• 

V** 

:::: 

~ 

•  • 

•«•« 

... 

•••• 

•-• 

• 

L"' 

|o 

Insubondina-^iort 

n** 

••• 

• 

„ 

•  ■•• 

i" 

•  • 

• 

• 

•• 

•  •M 

•• 

:u* 

... 

... 

.... 

- 

£r* 

..• 

• 

r.*" 

•• 

• 

• 

le 

/ 

O  -  /  VV«e>< 
(VVee/c-  4  Weeks 
tMoni-h-3f^on-l-ha 

4*ro3.      -6/Vfo9, 

7Af«»s.     -l2Mo«. 
/(/ear-    -2t/eai-3 
3yeara  -5  Ueoi-a 

r:it 

*■■• 

:::: 

H:: 

:~" 

III* 

Ji? 

•  ••• 

«•• 

isi 

iV,' 

W 

rst 

"At 

•• 

nu 

::« 

p; 

iU* 

•IS* 

3«» 

M.. 

•  ••* 

• 

"• 

*••! 

•••• 

•• 

P 

•*• 

•••• 

15** 

;ir 

•  • 

•• 

::"' 

l«» 

Lengfh 

' 

• 

••• 

•• 

•  ••■ 

M* 

•••• 

•• 

.... 

"i- 

:u- 

• 

•••• 

•• 

It** 

•• 

17 

of                < 

■•«• 

r::: 

w* 

x; 

•  ••« 

•••• 

••"- 

— *; 

"" 

••• 

>••• 

)««■ 

•••• 

• 

•••■ 

•• 

r.:- 

••■• 

20 

d«rv/ce 

'" 

' 

• 

« 

• 

••• 

•  ■• 

* 

»« 

*• 

• 

3 

• 

• 

« 

• 

« 

/ 

N 

• 

« 

• 

• 

• 

* 

/ 

<"«  -  'o 

• 

- 

"-• 

;••• 

• 

•:•• 

iU: 

• 

•••< 

«« 

• 

• 

•  • 

• 

• 

13 

l<?  -    22 

■•• 

^:v•^ 

KH 

»•• 

• 

f-fj 

:r.: 

I:-.! 
iK' 

py 

• 

IJH 

•• 

L« 

•••• 

37 

^5«      <     23-26 

•  ••• 

• 

•• 

(g 

••*• 

si- 

sa 

«>• 

1*^ 

v." 

••• 

n 

• 

27  -  30 
31   -  35 

36   -40 

*•• 

•  • 

" 

■• 

:;•• 

•• 

■  •.« 

••• 

r" 

•-** 

16 

■  •• 

' 

•*** 

**■ 

* 

• 

••« 

•• 

•• 

4 

k 

• 

« 

• 

• 

• 

/ 

<* 

b-^ 

2o 

^.: 

» 

• 

It; 

• 

.... 

• 

•«•• 

•  • 

15 

2/  -      ZS 

26  -     30 

3/   -     35 

36  -   40 

1^    41-45 

1^ 

••• 

jS 

is 

•  •* 

...• 
•*•• 

•fc^ 

•M 

U~ 

•• 

31 

Poif  < 

•  ••• 

ill? 

« 

111! 

.«.« 
•«*• 

».»* 

•  >•• 

•^7 

• 

!••• 

•  •• 

•" 

39 

•  • 

>• 

::;• 

:•■■•■ 

.... 

•7* 

•— 

•••• 

.^ 

16 

**" 

•" 

•• 

•••• 

• 

* 

• 

• 

4 

o 

«</.-...' JL../   ^V  .^    .-   /   *'"* 

/« 

i 

ii"' 

\i^ 

•  a 

ii 

•M* 

•* 

li 

i 

60 

\  Mar-nlmW 

•• 

imf 

••• 

i 

::•• 

>••* 

• 

■£' 

*• 

P 

r* 

40 

,                                                                                                                                                                                                                     /  i./V»  vv 

<^*.  Parf-nH 

mTc 

^- 

.■If 

•  • 

il? 

3J 

1   Boai-d 
Home  Condirions    < 

•                                      Rcni  Home 

•«* 

rs^ 

:H1 

'**• 

•• 

S« 

43 

»»M 

**'• 

• 

i»T 

»- 

« 

r~ 

14 

V  Own  Horn* 

• 

• 

•• 

2 

< 

HoO»p*ndenf, 

[ST 

M«« 

>••• 

::•• 

••t 

« 

/ 

•  ••• 

30 

t 

»•• 

»••* 

r*' 

■• 

le 

3 

:•." 

•  • 

8 

^ 

• 

1 

7b  yw/,  Sourc  m  C  e/wm  /-» 

35 

12 

do 

?i 

(ffe/Of-oefue 

1^ 

_^ 

L£ 

»r-r 

«/'• 

aio 

"f 

roi 

«" 

ro< 

^« 

fnt 

«// 

Vha 

no 

?•' 

-ne 

r,y" 

iai 

lw< 

r  e 

f  ' 

^i 

0' 

7</ 

) 

• 

-14- 

type  that  causes  the  ttirnover,  and  the  type  that  stays  with  the 
company.  Thus  we  would  have  between  the  tv/o  groups  one  ccmparison  on 
"psy"*  another  on  "age",  etc.  This  would  probably  involve  considerable 
clerical  labor.  But  if  it  is  possible  to  make  any  generalizations  at 
all,  they  ought  surely  to  be  produced  from  comparing  several  aspects 
of  the  two  groups.  If  there  is  any  difference  bet'-voen  the  group 
that  stays  and  the  group  that  leaves,  it  will  be  brotight  out  by  this 
method . 


RETURN  CIRCULATION  DEPARTMENT                     y 
TO—^  202  Main  Library                   642-3403     I 

LOAN  PERIOD  1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

LIBRARY  USE 

This  book  is  due  before  closing  lime  on  the  lost  dote  stamped  below 

DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW 

LIBRARY  USE  1 

CI  16 '79 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA,  BERKELEY 
FORM  NO.  DD6A,  20m,  1  1  /78        BERKELEY  CA  94720 

U                                      -                 ' 

FOURTEEN  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT 

Th.s  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below'  or 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed.  ' 

-— 5!::!::!i^^^l!i^fli^^bject^  ,ecall. 


I'D  21-100m-2,'55 
(Bl39822)476 


General  Library 

University  of  California 

oerlieley 


